Nativism vs. Conservatism

Liberals incessantly harp on the fate of unsuspecting American Indians being infected with European maladies, yet that outrage doesn’t jibe with their insistence that amnesty be granted to illegal aliens, some of whom carry diseases eradicated long ago from North America.

In short, if you are in favor of an immigration solution (and all solutions are branded with a scarlet A) then you are simply in favor of trafficking all sorts of gross disease as so many cockroaches into our beloved ‘Murica:

Do amnesty advocates care that blood tainted with malaria, a disease eradicated from the USA back in the 1940s, was deemed responsible for outbreaks in California, New Jersey, NYC, and Texas?

How about Asian illegals introducing dengue fever, a viral disease previously unknown in the US, as well as hemorrhagic dengue fever, which is fatal if untreated?

Could it be that amnesty advocates feel that, as part of the retribution for white European ancestors contaminating America’s indigenous people, hundreds of years later it’s acceptable that innocent children require lifesaving platelet transfusions to cure dengue fever?

So when I was asked about this article, I had something in the memory banks. This sort of nativist swill has been going around for decades, and frankly it’s plagued the conservative movement long enough. Of course, that really upset a good friend of mine when I fought fire with fire… but I think it’s time we, in Virginia, start having this conversation in earnest once again.

Should the nativists be welcomed in the GOP? Do conservatives have a moral duty to drive them out of the party?

There are 12 million people in the United States today who want a better lives for themselves and their families, whose only crime was that they came to America to do it.

The nativists have a very simple solution: apprehend all 12 million of them, boxcar them back to their point of origin, and drive them out as so many locusts. One recent article from the UK Economist outlined that simply warehousing that many people today costs about $5,000 per apprehension. That’s right — for bedding alone while ICE determines their legal status and where to ship them, it would cost the American taxpayer $6 billion just to house and feed 12 million immigrants.

…and that’s not including the cost of law enforcement, the judicial system, the cost of transport, and the like.

Here’s another tricky thing that nativists don’t mention in their rush to rescue Massive Resistance from the ashes of history: how precisely do you apprehend 12 million people? Checkpoints? Papers, papers please? Searches? NSA metadata? What civil liberties are we willing to surrender in order to perform all this D&E? Does the nativist opinion of a FEMA camp change if they turn into concentration camps for undocumented immigrants?

(1) The nativists have no home in the modern Republican Party. A small history lesson — the Republican Party is the party that ended slavery, that fought Jim Crow, that passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1950s and ushered in the civil rights era. The Republican Party is the party that is fighting against welfare, fighting against the entitlement system, fighting for individual freedom. The Republican Party is the party that embraces the single-largest non-violent civil rights protest in our nation’s history — the pro-life movement. The Republican Party is the party that destroyed Soviet Communism. The Republican Party is the party that fought for free goods and free trade. On the right side of history, you will find the GOP at every turn.

These clowns? These Know Nothings?

…have no place in our history.
They have no place in the history of a Free America.
They deserve nothing more than a footnote to the ignorance that liberty rightly stamps out.

(2) Conservatives have a moral duty to drive out nativism once and for all.

Free markets, free speech, and a free society — that is the cornerstone of American conservatism. We are a county that tears down walls, not one that builds them. The American conservative movement has driven out ideologies from our camp once before. We drove out the progressives and the America First movement in the 1940s. We did it again with the John Birch Society in the 1960s. We did it once again with the anarchists in the 1980s. Every time we have purged the ranks of poison, we have emerged stronger, producing leadership such as Eisenhower, Goldwater, and Reagan.

It’s time to clean house.

You will hear a lot of talk in the coming months about immigration reform. In it will be included guest worker programs, documented worker status, real border enforcement that doesn’t require walls, and a sound program that takes an antiquated immigration system and brings it into the 21st century. That’s not amnesty, that’s reform.

Conservatives embrace the idea of more Americans coming into this country to work hard and prosper.

Nativists reject Pedro.

The Republican Party has a duty to preserve what is ennobling about the American experiment. A modern day version of Operation Wetback with jackboots and checkpoints designed to boxcar 8-20 million people back “their point of origin” (read: Mexico) is obtuse at best and horribly violent to our civil liberties at worse. Conservatives are smarter than this, and America deserve better than nativist hate.

Yay! Let’s drive everyone out of the Republican party and call them names, drive the TEA Party out, drive conservatives out, drive small-government, anti-tax folks out, and then we can have the party that will never get more than 11% of the vote, ever!
This is the dumbest, most intellectually insulting article I have ever read on a conservative blog. No joke.

I don’t think that’s true. There’s plenty of room for debate about how we go about immigration reform. The issue isn’t concerns with immigration reform, it’s what those concerns are.

Shaun’s point here illustrates that perfectly – the idea that immigration reform is going to lead the resurgence of malaria, dengue fever, the plague, Ebola or whatever is just patently ridiculous. So ridiculous that you have to question the motives of anybody willing to bring up such a ludicrous point.

I’m not afraid to say it, and neither is Shaun – there are some people in our party who don’t want immigration reform because they are nativists. Those folks should be shunned.

Tim D

All illegal aliens should be deported in accordance with federal law — you know, the laws We the People put on the books? I support sovereignty and the rule of law — does that make me a ‘nativist’?

Depends – why do you think all those folks should be deported, besides the fact that it’s the law? I doubt you think every American should be forced to buy health insurance, but that’s also the law. If one is not okay and the other is, why is that?

John Sheppard

Because one is against a natural right and the other is not. That’s the difference. I have a right NOT to be forced to buy a product and violate my freedom of self determination and association. An illegal immigrant has no Natural right to break a nation’s border.

I would disagree with the contention that being require to buy a product violates a natural right, but you’re still missing the point. When you argue that we should follow the “law,” and make an appeal to the rule of law, you can’t pick and choose which laws to support and which not to support. We all don’t like Obamacare, but it’s the law and it has been upheld as Constitutional, even if we disagree with that decision. If you’re going to make an appeal to the law, you can’t pick and choose which to follow and which not to follow.

John Sheppard

Well disagree all you want, But there are more natural rights, than what are listed in the COnstitution and BOR. And you would be wrong that being forced to buy a product by government does NOT violate natural rights. I named two that it violates: Free association and self determination.

As a defender of the Constitution I would think you would realize it goes against Individual Liberty and our natural rights NOT to be coerced by government into private commerce.

And under your pretzel logic that IF we demand upholding the rule of law (good law that doesn’t violate rights), then we must support bad law (that violates rights and is unconstitutional), then Dr King, Rosa Parks and the two young men at the lunch counter should have shut up and gone home and not whined about oppression.

So yes you can pick and choose what law to follow and apply based on rather that law is just or NOT.

If this were a dictatorship or a monarchy, I’d agree with you. But it isn’t. The laws are made with the consent of the governed, and allowing people to pick and choose which laws to follow and apply is pure anarchy.

The Constitution provides a means for securing our rights and liberties, and that means has been followed here, even if we disagree with it. Here’s the problem – I agree with you that we shouldn’t support bad laws that are unconstitutional, but when those bad laws are held to be constitutional, our only redress is repeal. That means we need to muster the votes to repeal those laws. That’s what the Civil Rights movement did – first through the courts, then through the legislature. That’s the correct way. Simply saying “that law is unjust, I won’t follow it” is a recipe for anarchy.

Rednecksrule

Answer bc3b’s question– what enforcement element of the 86 law was put into effect?

DFCtomm

Unless of course, that law is an immigration law, and then your all for that type of anarchy.

John Sheppard

Well then you were against what King Rosa Parks and the boys at the lunch counter did. And today we live in a plutocracy with the trappings of or a shell of “laws being made with the consent of the governed” and ” Constitution providing a means for securing our rights and liberties”

That is no longer true with the Democrats and Republicans in charge of everything. Ignoring the constitution at every whim, and doing whatever the hell they want with no regard to the people or the Constitution.

I wasn’t born then, but no I am not. King and others, like the NAACP and Thurgood Marshall, had been steadily, through the courts, working to overturn the laws. They then took the fight to Washington and got it done that way. That kind of civil disobedience may be appropriate, especially for what they were fighting for, but I don’t see anything in modern society that rises to that level of injustice.

John Sheppard

So if our constitutional by the consent of the people government passes a law that says you can’t read your bible or you must kill anyone over 65 once a month to keep elderly sick population low, then one should follow it until they can repeal it using the system?

I understand you should try and repeal bad laws IF you are able, but sometimes the only choice is to practice civil disobedience.

What!!!!! Ok, well then. I’m selling my car to you for $4 million, so you better take out a loan. I’ll be over to enforce this trade shortly. Have the money ready.

bc3b

Name ONE enforcement element of any consequence from the 1986 amnesty that has been put into effect.

Rednecksrule

He sets up a straw man. Let me tell you you bloody fool… Here is reality… Immigration IS IMPORTING POVERTY. That is a fact. It is an influx of people who are not employable in a third world country. So guys like you want to foist this population on the US Taxpayer and then like Democrats whine wacism wacism wacism… It is Not WACIST not to have to shoulder the burden for the world’s poor.

John Sheppard

I will say I don’t agree with claims that Amnesty will bring diseases in and of itself, but they could definitely bring diseases depending on where they migrate from. That is possible, but I doubt it would be any epidemic, and that could go IF they came from Romania or even parts of Scotland and Ireland (the slums there) where my ancestors come from.

It won’t bring any more disease than it already has. The TB that came in is already here. Obviously the criminals who already made it here can’t bring more in. However amnesty is about future behavior. If we grant amnesty why bother going through the naturalization process where you are checked for disease. Just cross the Mexican or Canadian border anywhere you wish, or jump your tourist visa.

brianmacker

You don’t think the truth is true? He just wrote an article for which the logical conclusion is that wanting to maintain border control means you are a nativist. Why waste all this money on the INS and border checkpoints, visas, etc. If you are just going to grant amnesty every couple decades. Seems like an enormous wate of money. Especially since you think the very reasons used to justify border control are “patently ridiculous”. Let people with TB, Dengue malaria, etc. Go where they please. The current Ebola outbreak in Africa (where incidentally they’ve closed borders completely) is no proplem. In fact, we should open our arms to incoming refugees fleeing such an epidemic. Our health infrastructure surely can handle this non-existant issue.

Steve, you’ve got to stop with this nonsense. When someone is labelled as a racist or a nativist that’s not name calling – that’s describing their behavior.

There’s a difference between saying someone is a bigot, or a homophobe, or a nativist and saying they’re an idiot, a doodiehead, or something like that. That’s actual name calling.

It’s being intellectually dishonest to claim that Shaun’s post, or any of the others from Republicans who are extremely concerned about the xenophobic nonsense coming out of the mouths of some in our party is simply name calling.

Steven Thomas

Brian, it is also intellectually dishonest to claim that anyone who wants any alternative that includes some degree of enforcing our borders or current laws is a “racist”, “nativist”, or any other of a number fo epithets that one could easily be sued for libel over. I do not favor the current situation, also don’t favor doing away with all laws. I am somewhere in the middle on this issue, yet Shaun has called me a racist, a nativist and a number of other things I would not want my kids to see. That crap has to stop.
It is NOT racist to want our laws enforced. It is NOT nativist to expect that we should enforce our own borders at least as well as every other country enforces theirs- including the countries the most immigrants provene from. It’s called “being reasonable”, and you two need lessons in that.
For that matter, how do you ever expect to build a coalition, even within the right, on this or any issue when you call people racist? If they actually believe one race is superior to another, fine, but that is a far cry from simply wanting people who broke our laws to pay the ascribed penalty (as we would have to if breaking the laws in their countries of origin, whatever they are). When you throw out these loaded terms and jack up the hysterics, all you do is lower peoples’ antennae for when some racist behavior actually IS exhibited.
Get a hold of yourselves.

First, nowhere are you mentioned in here by name. So stop with the libel nonsense. Second, Shaun doesn’t say anything about specific policy suggestions in this debate. Nobody is saying that we shouldn’t enforce the borders (which we’re already doing), either.

I don’t need any lessons in being reasonable. If anything, that’s what I get crapped on most from folks like you about. I’m too reasonable.

I expect to build a coalition of people who aren’t racist. Who aren’t adamantly opposed to any kind of solution on immigration reform and call any discussion of a path to citizenship “amnesty.” Who aren’t putting up nonsense like illegals are bringing malaria back. That these people are stealing our jobs, or raping our women, or committing crimes, or coming here to have their “anchor babies,” or taking advantage of entitlements, or any of the other complaints you see daily in the comments section of any piece on immigration reform on any news or commentary website in America.

If you want to be part of the reasonable coalition, stop looking for excuses to be offended when those of us who are willing to point out the elephant in the room do so.

It’s all too easy to ignore the racism and let it go in order not to offend anybody or force someone out of our coalition. I think that’s cowardly, and I won’t do it. If we don’t police ourselves, nobody is going to take us seriously. And they shouldn’t, because we won’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Steven Thomas

Oh, I’ve gotten “the treatment” before on Facebook.
And no one has ever thought that tossing out epithets for no good reason would result in people calling you or your cause “reasonable”.
Stop tossing out white elephants. Not once have I heard the type of stuff you keep claiming to be against. Most people want a well reasoned solution…. just not something that rewards people who break the law.

Again, all you need to do is read the comments section on any website that brings up immigration reform. You’ll see everything I’m talking about and more.

Most people do want a reasoned solution, but hiding behind the “we don’t want to reward people who break the law” isn’t going to get you a reasoned solution. It gets you the status quo. Thinking about immigration reform in that way is just a recipe for failure.

NM156

You are a progressive infiltrator. Who’s funding you, that’s what we’d like to know. Destroying America is pretty much outside the range of possible definitions of “conservative American”.

The problem is that Shaun is a big advocate of allowing foreigners to violate our sovereignty any time they please. He is a post-American not unlike Obama.

bc3b

“xenophobic nonsense” – glad you don’t resort to name-calling.

brianmacker

The behavior being used to label wasn’t racist. There is nothing racist about being for border control to prevent and control the importation of human, animal and plant disease. You haven’t even made your case that border control is ineffective for this, and instead of granting people their actual arguments you call them racists. Even if you were to properly argue that border control does not and cannot prevent the spread of disease that doesn’t mean anyone who still doesn’t agree does so on racist grounds. You fipuckijg moron,

Glaivester

So we don’t need people in the party who think that they owe more allegiance to the interests of current Americans than to the interests of foreigners (including some would-be Americans)?

You think Americans owe no more loyalty to fellow Americans than to anyone else in the world. You’re a traitor.

No, we don’t need people in the party who want to exclude people because of race or national origin. I owe no allegiance to any individual in this country, just to the Constitution. There’s a definition of treason in that document, you might want to read it.

Glaivester

No allegiance to the American nation (i.e. the people) just to the American government. Got it.

Of course it was a compliment. I always take it as a compliment when people read what I write.

brianmacker

You are a traitor to conservatives, and republicans for being against the rule of law and against natural rights. Also for supporting this Miceal moorish hit piece against the American Thinker. Not that I care about “convervative” issues like abortiin but maybe it is you who should be purged. Why aren’t you a democrat?

Try again. Allegiance is a different legal concept to personal loyalty. Feel free to continue trying to wrap your nonsense around whichever word you choose. It doesn’t matter. Your opinion has no merit.

Bored

You should be loyal to your fellow Americans — but you and Shaun have just as much allegiance to foreigners who believe they are above the law. That mindset is a post-American mindset.

No, I don’t have any allegiance to foreigners, either. My allegiance is the Constitution. Is that not clear from the conversations above? There is no post-America, thus no post-American mindsets.

Rednecksrule

Your allegiance is to the Constitution..isn’t that nice. So you agree that we should in fact have laws. One part of those laws is the ability to control who gets to be in the country and who has a right to the privileges of the country, right Bri? That means that you don’t get to come and squat and demand that because I came and squatted you have to let me in and give me the rights of a citizens to include health, education and welfare benefits. Right? Would that be what is called the rule of law?

If we decide that we want to allow folks to come and squat, then they can come and squat. And if we decide that they can’t, then they can’t, regardless of whether or not they do. The point here is that we need to fix a system that is broken, and the status quo isn’t working.

Rednecksrule

Fix a law that is broken? Stop that baloney. You are fixing nothing. At least stop that bull. You are too stupid to remember what happened in 86– a whole lot of amnesty that was supposed to be balanced by the same damn provisions that you and your Amnesty buddies are pushing… Employer sanctions to stop the hiring of illegals… didn’t happen. Work place requirements for being legal to work… right.. didn’t get enforced. So now you want an amnesty and high levels of new immigration and what will get enforced?

The amnesty will. Can you at least say that in your filthy little lobbyist pie hole? My employers will get lots of cheap labor and the US will get another amnesty with more to follow, assuming that anyone wants to come to this future third world country…

DFCtomm

I think you be the one waking up, but far too late for it to do you or us any good.

I’m not trolling. I’m being honest. There are a lot of folks who comment, especially when they’re referred to us from a radio show or some other site, that I really don’t understand how they function in society.

JoshuaCJCohen

You’re an idiot. Conservatives are opposed to ILLEGAL immigration, regardless of where they are from. This isn’t about Race. The left makes it about race. Stop acting like a progressive. Or better yet, keep doing it but stop pretending to be a conservative and just accept your true self.

John Sheppard

But Brian is a moderate, not a conservative. He said so in a post he wrote defending Shauny boy.

I’m not interested in playing games about where I or anybody else sits on the ideological spectrum. That’s a parlor game.

John Sheppard

No it matters when your blog claims conservatism. This article is a parlor game. Let’s call all people who oppose legalizing the illegal aliens nativists and use progressive talking points to do it.muhahaha

That’s not what we’re doing. Shaun was pretty clear about what he was saying.

brianmacker

He’s calling his fellow Republicans racist for opposing amnesty. Period. There’s no nuance in polictics, because as you said there is no way to separate motivation. since racists are for Republicans then you are all racists.

“There are 12 million people in the United States today who want a better lives for themselves and their families, whose only crime was that they came to America to do it. The nativists have a very simple solution: apprehend all 12 million of them, boxcar them back to their point of origin, and drive them out as so many locusts.”

In other words, he is calling opponents of amnesty racists. It’s right there in the article. Can open borders extremists not tell the truth even when the lie is as obvious as this?

Rednecksrule

Bri is whatever whoever is paying his filthy little lobbyist salary wants him to be…

When the folks who oppose comprehensive immigration reform make it about race, then it’s about race. It’s not always easy to separate when someone is motivated by racial animus and when they’re talking about principles. Sometimes it is. When it is, those folks need not be taken seriously and should not be treated like conservatives, Republicans or anybody worthy of being taken seriously.

brianmacker

Which is why I’m calling you a racist for being against completely open borders. No visas, no border stops, no passports, none of it. Since racists are for those things and so are you, and since it is hard to tell the difference, I’l just label you as the racist we all know every republican is for associating with all these racists. I’m not a republican so obviously I don’t have this problem. Let’s have open borders, and there will be no need for amnesty.

Nope. I don’t call myself a conservative if I’m forced to talk about ideology, which I don’t like to do because it’s pointless.

JoshuaCJCohen

Who is making it about race? You keep saying “race”, “race”, “race” like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. But no one is saying “stop immigration from Mexico and Panama”, we are saying “stop illegal immigration” and sure as hell don’t allow those here illegally to become citizens before you shore up the sieve that is the southern border.

It’s amazing how much you think you can figure out by asking me who I work for. Who do you work for? Is that going to be as telling?

My union is bipartisan, which is why they hired a Republican to lobby for them.

There’s no trolling going on here, by me. What you’re doing more fits the bill, especially the name calling.

John Sheppard

That’s a straw man you and Shaun picked up from the progressive talking points squad. Because MOST in the GOP, who don’t want to grant citizenship to these people who are here illegally, could care less about where they came from. Rather they are white, spanish, black or purple.

John Sheppard

But Hardly anyone wants to exclude anyone based on race. That’s a strawman progressive argument.

The folks we are talking about do. That’s the point. It doesn’t matter how few there are, they are there.

Jerry Benson

Does your allegiance to the Constitution include ENFORCING our existing immigration laws? The debate is not about excluding people, it’s about having a country governed by law. Your dismissal of Republicans who respect the law is dangerous and divisive. If you fail to enforce our laws, we have no laws.

Nobody is dismissing Republicans who respect the law. We are talking about folks who are unwilling to recognize that the law, as it exists, is not working and needs to be reformed and who are staunchly opposed to anything short of mass deportations, which no one believes is a rational or workable solution to this problem.

We live in a country governed by law, but we aren’t wedded to laws that don’t work. We have the ability to change them. That’s what we’re advocating for – developing a system that works, protects the borders and won’t cause damage to the economy to implement.

brianmacker

Mass deportation is the law. It is just that no one is enforcing it. You are dismissing the law, and anyone who supports it.

JoshuaCJCohen

Then I wish the government would obey the law, stop illegal immigration and deport those already here. Is that the law you were talking about or one that fits into your agenda?

Those people nor are the one’s who want to ship the ILLEGAL immigrants back to where they come from aren’t either. But I will say that what Shaun is advocating and the attacks he uses are identical to the extremist progressives he met with in RPV headquarters.

John Sheppard

Phsh!! And no one is defending racists, because those opposed to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, are opposed to it because they are illegal, not because they are brown. Again, I was just on a leftist site on this similar topic, and you guys give the same false tired arguments the leftists do.

DFCtomm

I agree with you, and that’s why I won’t be voting for the GOP anymore. Let it burn.

No, that’s not what he said. Read it again. We all support border control.

brianmacker

But the cartoon above is for border control, so you are a racist.

brianmacker

There is no reason for border control because … Racism. Any reason you give for border control can be made a racist stereotype. Want to control terrorism? Well find a racist cartoon that depicts all Arabs as terrorists and argues for border control. Now you can label anyone who wants border control for that reason a racist. Grab any article anywhere that argues for border control for any reason, slap on a racist cartoon, call them nativists, BAM.

Want to prevent the importation of animal disease. Just find a cartoon depicting Mexicans smuggling in fight cocks, or asians bringing in frankenfish. Bam. Agriculture control is racist.

brianmacker

Are you saying conservatives are stupid? I tend to agree.

WJ Alden

Enforcing immigration laws = “nativist.”

Not wanting to reward 12 million people for breaking the law = “nativist.”

Polls consistently show *at least* 40% of American favoring deportation over amnesty. Good luck winning elections after excluding all the so-called “nativists.”

Glenn Vestal

If you support amnesty, you are supporting the democrats platform, period! You might as well join their party! It’s a shame to see the depth the Republican leadership has sunk.
I’m getting out and becoming an Independent!

Manny

Straw Man much?

Colin

So if we’re opposed to amnesty, we’re racist?

Scout

No one has proposed amnesty, Colin. All proposals I’ve seen involve payment of a monetary penalty as a condition of normalization.

Colin

What this post, and a majority of proposed plans from Congress thus far aspire for is the politicization of immigration reform to curry favor with the Latino community in the fashion of Pres. Johnson and the Democrats with Civil Rights and the Great Society in the 1960’s.

Allow me to use the sentiment of Pres. Johnson to summarize this blog post: “We’ll be having those wetbacks voting Republican for the next 200 years.” Crass, but true.

Instead of focusing on the long term consequences and offering a viable alternative, the current proposals milling about in Washington, D.C. only want to win votes comes 2016.

First it’ll be a monetary penalty proposed by a bipartisan group of Representatives and Senators, then Congressional Democrats will “compromise” and support immigrants being required to learn English, then Republicans will want to include criminal background checks, eventually the White House and Democrat Senators will chime in and require amnesty “down the road.” It’s like 1986 all over again!

Doug Brown

Also keep an eye on how that monetary payment is collected and doled out and remember that USCIS is almost entirely self-financed, which is not a good thing, despite what some ‘government should be run like a business types’ might think.

How ’bout we actually deal with the problem first.
Why don’t we institute policies the decrease the demand of illegal immigration?
Like a guest worker program. Increase in Work Visas and also a large increase in legal immigration.
In 1986 we passed what is called amnesty but was then called “comprehensive immigration reform”
The border enforcement which was promised never materialized.
There were 3 million illegal immgrants at that time, most of which became citizens.
Now there are 11 million ( or 12, or 20 or 34 the numbers keep on changing depend on who is talking)
So far the status quo of de facto amnesty ( in which illegal immgrants still raise their children and work and protest, etc. while the border isn’t secured) is better then what has so far ( gang of 8) been proposed.
I could support a pathway to citizenship but only if you could gurantee I’m not back here 10 years down the road talking about “immigration reform” ( With the current administration I don’t think you can make that guarantee)
We do the next generation a disservice by shuffling this problem onto their shoulders ( along with several others)
No more bandaids. Fix the problem.

Rednecksrule

You will be in the exact spot you are ten years from now. Not one amnesty did anything but encourage more illegal immigration. The guys like this Shaun were touting 1986 as the end of illegal immigration… then there were six more amnesties that no one really acknowledges in the 1990s… and then people like this guy and the RINO establishment coupled with Democrats enforced nothing… now you are at tens of millions of illegals who are demanding legalization…
So amnesty away and unless the US is a total third world guano hole, where even third world aliens don’t want to come (a distinct possibility given the trajectory of this country) you will need another amnesty in no more than five years…

Glaivester

No one cares about the monetary penalty. “Amnesty” to most opponents means legalizing illegal aliens, based on the fact that the law passed in 1986 was called an amnesty.

That you can add some token fine and then declare that it isn’t technically amnesty by some dictionary definition is irrelevant.

You’re playing word games.

bc3b

We all know that any financial penalty will be waived. Name ONE enforcement procedure from the 1986 amnesty that has taken effect.

Bored

If illegal aliens are not returned home, it is amnesty. You can add whatever penalty you want (most of which will be waived), it’s still an amnesty.

Either we enforce our sovereignty or we don’t have a country. Obama seeks to “fundamentally transform” the United States because he hates our society. Not sure why a self-described conservative would act the same way.

That’s like saying “unless you go to jail you’re being pardoned.” That’s clearly not the case.

MD Russ

na·tiv·ism[ney-ti-viz-uhm]

noun
-the policy of protecting the interests of native inhabitants against those of immigrants.

I am afraid that this definition is a far cry from someone who wishes to control illegal immigration–a crime that allows unscreened and unlimited persons to jump the waiting line and enter the country without meeting any of the requirements for lawful immigration.

There is no question that the members of the John Birch Society were nativists, but you can’t lump them together with people who oppose immigration reform plans that include amnesty and a pathway to citizen for persons who broke our laws just to get here. We tried that in 1986 and it was an abysmal failure.

As for paying a fine as a condition of legal status, that is not how it is down elsewhere. I have live in or traveled to numerous foreign places from Europe to Russia to the Middle East to South America. In those countries if you are found to be there illegally, they don’t deport you or make you pay a fine to stay. They throw you in jail, make you pay a fine to get out, and then deport you.

Glaivester

“Nativism – The policy of protecting the interests of native inhabitants against those of immigrants.”

I’m trying to figure out why this is a slur – it’s like saying “This man loves his own children more than his neighbors! Evil!”

Wikipedia uses a different definition: “Nativism is the political position of demanding a favored status for certain established inhabitants of a nation as compared to claims of newcomers or immigrants.[1] Nativism typically means opposition to immigration and support of efforts to lower the political or legal status of specific ethnic or cultural groups because the groups are considered hostile or alien to the natural culture, and assumptions that they cannot be assimilated.”

I think that one is closer to accurate.

thatcher76

That’s why Wikipedia is not to be trusted in these instances. As you know, it’s open to editing by everyone and this lends itself to abuse by people with agendas. And the left is notorious for using language to further its agenda. (e.g. arch-conservative, homophobia, hard-right,

JoshuaCJCohen

Who opposes immigration? Your intellectual dishonesty is staggering. What part of “illegal” don’t you understand? Maybe your kid can get you a dictionary for Father’s day.

Please provide some evidence, in context, that indicates Ann Coulter opposes all immigration. I can believe Buchanan opposes it but I’ve never heard him say so.

JReynolds79

Shaun, it is intellectually dishonest to lay claim to the historicity of the Republican brand as it has ebbed and flowed over the course of the past two centuries…modern day Republicans are a far cry from those who fought for civil rights or ended slavery…now if you’re attempting to make a point about conservatism (as the title implies), you may have a point. But even conservatism has become an elastic term per certain elements of the party laying monopolistic claims to it.

Modern day Republicans are still the inheritors of a conservative vision that ended slavery, ended Jim Crow, defeated communism, and stand tall for the most defenseless in our society by providing opportunity and defending strong families.

Democrats don’t have that legacy… damn shame. You sure you’re in the right party?

JReynolds79

I’m sure insofar as I consider myself a Reagan Republican-practical and pragmatic-but if our brand is co-opted by socons then I might re-consider.

You are doing a helluva job Shaunny… I dunno maybe 75 percent of the Tea Party opposes amnesty. You know the guys that are all you have to keep the Republican party viable. You have managed to completely alienate us with your sheer stupidity in your stupid blog.

Now son, can the guano about “comprehensive immigration reform” cause it aint reform. Reform would be where the stupid government would actually enforce immigration laws. There is not a law on the book needed further. Your and the Democrat’s crap about this reform bill is the same old nonsense they have done for thirty years—cover up an amnesty in provisions that won’t be enforced. Then you get more illegal immigration and then you have to pass another amnesty. After you get your amnesty again… and you will because your corporate sponsors want it… you will need another amnesty in no more than seven years. That is what happened in 1986.

But… wait… guys like you are moving towards having no immigration laws at all… Why it isn’t a crime to come to the US and provide cheap labor for corporations, right son?

But MR Conservative… here is a fact–immigration is importing poverty. You are going to blather about how that isn’t true… well boy, illegal immigrants from Central America, walk across the border. They are not driving BMWs… So you MR CONSERVATIVE are going to saddle the US taxpayer with tens of millions of immigrants who need, use and like welfare programs.

And they vote Democratic–in droves… in droves son. Does California ring a bell son? It voted Republican until 1988… now it is a one party dictatorship post that little old amnesty in 86 which was followed by six more amnesties and complete and total lack of immigration enforcement…
Virginia which you are supposed to be leading, is heading that way…you seem to be losing every statewide election.. except for 2009 which was a year where the Tea Party came out for you…

So keep on pissing off the Tea Party… We can leave your stupid ass.

ShaunKenneyisaChalupa

After reading your comments and post, are you sure you’re in the right party? The GOP is not a conservative party anymore, it doesn’t know what the hell it is or wants to be except democrat lite.
“American institutions rest solely on good citizenship. They were created by people who had a background of self-government. New arrivals should be limited to our capacity to absorb them into the ranks of good citizenship. America must be kept American. For this I purpose, it’s necessary to continue a policy of restricted immigration. It would be well to make such immigration of a selective nature with some inspection at the source, and based either on a prior census or upon the record of naturalization. Either method would insure the admission of those with the largest capacity and best intention of becoming citizens. I am convinced that our present economic and social conditions warrant a limitation of those to be admitted. We should find additional safety in a law requiring the immediate registration of all aliens. Those’ who do not want to be partakers of the American spirit ought not to settle in America.” Calvin Coolidge said that in 1924 after he signed the 1924 Immigration Act. He called for Assimilation! Fewer numbers of arrivals to make it happen! Oh wait he’s a racist now! President Eisenhower ordered Operation Wetback in 1954 to deport thousands of illegals who entered the South West border states illegally. The same Eisenhower who led the first civil rights efforts from the Federal Govt. But Eisenhower is a racist now. It sounds like you need to learn some things about history, culture, etc. Instead you want to pander to the ethnic racism of LaRaza

Everrett Dirksen was a conservative. In fact he was one of those “Squishes always lose” Republicans. He backed Taft over Eisenhower, and shouted at Dewey at the convention “Don’t lead us down the path of defeat again”

Can you read? This was from two months ago. Is your life so barren that you’re still trolling for comments here?

Greg Letiecq

It’s intellectually lazy to characterize the issue of how to remove illegal aliens as “you can’t arrest 12 million people” and leave it at that. Doubly so since no one that I have ever spoken to, and no one I’ve ever read, has ever suggested that such a thing be done. This argument isn’t a policy discussion, it’s simply (the perhaps unwitting) parroting of liberal talking points.

I appreciate policy discussions, as long as that’s what we’re doing. Unfortunately it’s hard to find people with the moral courage willing to engage in them, who haven’t been lead astray by straw man arguments, empty propaganda, and unreasoned sloganeering.

‘Murica, indeed. I think people deserve better.

Rick_Sincere

In the 19th century, the nativist party was called the “Know-Nothings.” That about sums it up.

Hans K Pauley

I’m comforted that the level of debate right of centre has progressed to this point. I applaud the broader thesis. What likely will make this a pushing on an open door moment over the next few years is that conservatives who worship at the altar of free markets are likely to join this fight with increasing vigour. One premise I disagree with – there shouldn’t be a need to drive anyone out per se — but rather to isolate their retrograde point of view and expose it for the shallow, unworkable nonsense that it is. Politics of leadership always triumph over the politics of cynicism when enough time and effort is applied…

JReynolds79

Great point-my only fear is to wrap your head around the theory requires a level of intelligence that isn’t currently present in today’s political conversations.

I am glad I found this site it’s great to get a perspective from various views within the party. This is also great post for discussion. That being said, Shaun, did you even read and then digest what the article said?

If s o you would have seen that the author was calling for health screenings of immigrants which is apparently current practice anyways. Furthermore nowhere do you explain your definition of a nativist. The author was merely describing a second and third order effect of the current state of immigration policy (not law) and also happened to point out the liberal hypocrisy in their positions as well. I have no issues with immigrants (wife is Chinese) as long as they are a benefit to the country and come here legally. The disease issue just further backs up the position of why we should not have defacto open borders.

The current positions and material being used to back it up from the establishment does not make logical sense (we need more labor to save the economy?). And I also don’t believe anyone in the establishment has the conviction to enforce any sort of border co trolls should they even be passed. In fact I believe they would side with progressives in never enforcing the borders period. And that’s a problem the establishment has to fix with its base. It’s getting harder and harder to distinguish an establishment republican from the democrats when they use the liberal/progressive language and arguments.

mpolito

Let’s review a few facts about immigrants and immigration. Shaun has recently written about how he is a Catholic (as am I), and Catholics are often think that because we almost all are descended from late-19th/early-20th immigrants from Ireland, Italy, Germany, Poland, etc., and we became Republicans over time, the same thing will happen to today’s immigrants (who are Hispanic). Unfortunately, this narrative is misleading. Let’s go over why-

(1) White Catholics are *still* more Democratic than white Protestants. White Catholics voted 60% for Romney -a record for a Republican- but white Protestants voted 75% for Romney. Even if their overall significance has been diminished, the voting trends from a century ago persist, and it continues to affect American politics. Even if new immigrants follow this same pattern (which would itself take a very long time), the trends would still harm the GOP.

(2) There are reasons to believe Hispanics won’t become Republicans over time, even as they join the middle class. There are three basic reasons for this: (a) we have a massive welfare state today, unlike when our ancestors came; (b) communication and transportation technology has made it easier to contact and travel home, discouraging assimilation; and (c) our country has changed to embrace ‘multiculturalism,’ which means our institutions do not encourage assimilation. My great-grandparents were German immigrants who moved to Queens, NY in the 1920s. They did not want my grandmother to learn German, and she doesn’t know any to this day. Compare this with a friend of mine who attends high school in Fairfax County: he is called a ‘racist’ by other Hispanic students because he is Hispanic and prefers to speak English at the school.

(3) It is hard to deport 11 million illegal immigrants- so what do you do? How about enforcing the laws we have (which is not being done), and tighten enforcement further, before even considering exempting millions of people from the law? Either way, the immigrants’ voting is going to be a disaster for the GOP, so at the very least we have to get something worthwhile out of it.

bc3b

In decades long past, 80% of the immigrants did not share a common culture or language. There was no “Dial 1 for Polish” nor were government forms printed in Italian. Immigrants had to assimilate. Also, there was no chain migration, which can turn 12 million (how long has that number been thrown around?) uneducated, unskilled aliens into 50 million uneducated, unskilled aliens over 20 years.
Canada and Mexico (yes Mexico) attempt to limit immigration to educated professionals who can benefit their countries. I guess Canadians and Mexicans are racist.
If someone like Shaun can become Executive Director of a state Republican party, is it any wonder why we lose so often?

You don’t lose that often– after guys like this help the Democrats to another massive amnesty, you will lose every bloody election fool. California is a one party state now… you and this Shaun doofus will see to it that the US is a one party state.

No, we won’t. Do you honestly think that, even in the event of a “massive amnesty” (which no one is proposing) that every single illegal will register to vote and then show up? Not hardly. California and those other heavily Democratic states are heavily Democratic anyway, regardless of their demographics.

JoshuaCJCohen

“…which no one is proposing…” What? I guess you havne’t been paying attention. Not only is it being proposed, once those 12 million have been given amnesty and legal status they will be able to sponsor and bring immediate family. Recent nationwide elections have been decided in the 1 – 3% range. 12 million is more than 3% of current population.

Shaun talks about cleaning the party. He’s right. Time to drive out the appeasers.

You said amnesty. If you would stop labeling anything short of mass deportations as amnesty, we might be able to have an actual discussion on immigration reform.

WJ Alden

Amnesty is forgiveness for crimes committed. It does not mean you get to keep what you stole. If you steal a car, an amnesty means you don’t get punished for it. It does not mean you get to keep the car.

Amnesty for illegal immigrants would mean sending illegals home without fining them or sending them to jail first. The current bill is far worse than merely amnesty – it is amnesty plus a reward for their crime.

Name one other type of crime we would fight this way. Name one. You will not stop future illegal immigration by letting current illegals remain. Everyone knows that. Amnesties for illegal immigrants have been tried in multiple countries in Europe. They have always resulted in more illegal immigration.

In 1986 you got what you wanted. You got amnesty. You were honest enough to call it that, too. You got it in exchange for promises of enforcement – promises of enforcement which were never kept. The requirement that illegal immigrants pay back taxes? Rescinded in 1988 as the result of a single sentence in a 490 page tax bill, at the behest of one Charles Schumer. Ever heard of him? Requiring employers to verify status? Rescinded because people claimed it was encouraging discrimination.

And funding for the Border Patrol? Reagan actually cut funding for enforcing the law before the ink on the 1986 *amnesty* was even dry (see NYT link below).

You are a liar. Amnesty proponents are liars. You are neofedualists seeking to cut wages for Americans and destroy the American middle class.

Waiting – the wait that matters is that wait back home, in their own country. They don’t care about citizenship.

Penalties – the penalty in the current bill comes to about $1500, spread out over more than a decade. That’s the price of a flat screen TV, or a (very modest) vacation. It’s nothing.

Probation – huh? What does that even mean?

Rednecksrule

Virginia is an immigrant destination. You have lost every major election since 2008. With fools like you advising the Republican party, the Democrats don’t have to work very hard. Oh I know, it is because those damn Tea Party members say bad things about immigrants… boo hoo…if only they will say nice things about a nation of immigrants and opening the borders like you want.. Does it occur to you that NOT ONE Democrat opposes the last amnesty bill… Not one. See because they know their voters.

Good luck fool… keep on pushing for amnesties and you will be extinct…

No, we haven’t. We swept every statewide office in 2009, and we control 9 of 12 congressional seats, a supermajority in the House of Delegates, and a tie in the State Senate.

This isn’t about electoral politics, as Shaun noted. It’s about solving this problem in a way that makes sense.

Rednecksrule

You have lost every state wide election since 2008. McCain–Mr Amnesty himself LOST. Romney, Allen x2..you lose an election to a Clinton Carpet Bagger for governor… In short you are dead because it is now a state of immigrants. It won’t be long before Democrats win the Legislature. And what do you stand for anyway? You are arguing against immigration laws all over the place here… it isn’t a crime..blah blah blah…no it is cheap labor for your corporate sponsors. Your stupid party is extinct and no amount of pandering to Latinos is going to matter–they vote Democrat. You had a chance to control immigration and what did you do–yeah Bush’s Catch and Release program and now you are done… You guys might as well become Democrats.

No, we haven’t. Facts are facts. We swept every statewide office in 2009, which I pointed out to you and you ignored. The Democrats won’t win the legislature for at least another decade thanks to redistricting. We don’t have any corporate sponsors, and I’m not arguing against immigration laws. I’m supporting comprehensive immigration reform.

Rednecksrule

You lost every state wide election except for that year, and that was driven by the Tea Party which by the way opposes your f ing amnesty. You got swept in every state wide election last year didn’t you? And did Mr Amnesty carry the Latino vote in 2008 to win the state here? Stop bullshting with that comprehensive immigration reform crap. That is the same old nonsense that won’t be enforced to get the public to swallow an amnesty and huge levels of immigration on top of that amnesty.

DFCtomm

2009? What year is it? It looks like rednedsrule is right, and you are a fool.

Well, we won back three Congressional seats from Democrats in 2010, including one that had been held by a Democratic incumbent for over twenty years, bringing our total of Congressional seats to 9 (R) and 3 (D). In 2011, we expanded our majority in the House of Delegates from 59 to 66, and took control of the State Senate back from the Democrats. In 2012 we held every single Congressional seat we took from the Democrats in 2010, although Obama did win again and we lost the Senate race. In 2013, we increased to a super-majority in the House of Delegates of 68 seats, even while losing all the statewide offices and our tie breaking vote in the State Senate.

So, yeah, we have plenty to squawk about.

cargosquid

“decade thanks to redistricting”

And then what? That is admitting that we lose without it. And “comprehensive immigration reform” is code words for amnesty….like “sensible gun laws” is code for gun control.

What you guys call condescending is really just my exasperation at having people read things into the words I write that aren’t there. There are no code words. There are words. Comprehensive means all inclusive. That’s all it means.

Beatrice Pryor

On the contrary, the word “comprehensive” means essentially nothing. It’s a word like “collective” or “public” or “capitalism”. An essentially meaningless, imprecise term that can interpreted as the interpreter chooses.

No, what it means is “complete; including all or nearly all elements or aspects of something.” That’s the use I’m giving it. I want reform that fixes everything at once so we don’t have to do this piecemeal or again in five or ten years.

Beatrice Pryor

Right, but your definition isn’t the definition being used by Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, or any of the other fossils in the Senate.

The bigger problem here is a fundamental disconnect within the people themselves and the resulting disconnect of the language between political factions.

It’s not my fault if Democrats are misusing the English language. I’m simply using the word as it was intended to be used.

MarkJReynolds

Your absolutely right. Obama’s second victory was a direct result of Reagen’s amnesty. The GOP is a joke. That they would throw their base (white males) under the bus to chase after fantasy’s like the “Hispanic vote” tells you all you need to know. They’re done. We will be living in a country ruled by one party for the duration. The fact that so many Republican’s are seeking amnesty for the invaders, suicidal.

Beatrice Pryor

It’s all about politics, Brian. To say that it’s not hampers your credibility even further.

You’ll be losing my vote over amnesty. Why should I bother going to the polls and vote republican? You don’t believe in the rule of law, and below you state ( with zero argument) that I have no right not to be forced to buy something. Does that extend to prostitutes, and dope? I’m all for legalizing both but I’m not appreciative of my government forcing me to buy them. Yet, you just written that the anyone, not just the government, can force me to buy stuff because I don’t have any right to refuse.

Because there are more issues than this one to be arguing over? Look, if you want to vote for the Democrats, go for it. But nobody here is arguing for amnesty, and we all oppose Obamacare, even if it is constitutional.

Stop frothing at the mouth and start thinking rationally.

zaugg

The only thing worse than a Republican is a Democratic. You are the problem.

zaugg

Wha? We lost the last two presidential elections. We have a Democratic led Senate. I personally suffer with a Dem governor- Hickenlooper. Who is this “we” you refer to?

I was talking about Virginia Republicans, but overall, Republicans don’t lose that often either. We control a majority of the governorships, a majority of the state legislatures, and the House of Representatives. We’re likely going to take back the Senate in the fall. Sure, we lost two Presidential elections, but we won the previous two. These things are cyclical.

WJ Alden

How’d Republicans do in the 2006 elections, after the Republican-controlled Senate passed a massive amnesty bill?

leebo13

Please Remind me. How did Virginia do in the last Gubernatorial Election. Terry McCaullif Please

I’m not pushing amnesty and I’m an in-house lobbyist, which means I only lobby for one group. I’m sorry you have a problem with people exercising their first amendment rights to petition the government. I guess you’re not a libertarian.

leebo13

Do you have a job? If so good for you. About 20% of Americans are either unemployed or part time. The people who should be most upset about more illegals coming in are Americans of Hispanic Descent and Americans of African Descent. Guess who’s jobs the illegals are taking

Doug Brown

How are you going to fix a broken system if the people and tools you call on can’t deliver a working system?

ghostofteddalton

What’s most interesting is just how much this nativism backfired in terms of Asian voters. They really weren’t the target of these attacks, but they’ve turned hard left in Virginia and nationally. Romney got a smaller percentage of the Asian vote than he received from Hispanics. That’s mind-boggling. Asians have higher socioeconomic stats than whites…..they should lean GOP. Yet the Know-Nothings with their constant immigration drumbeat have driven this group away from the GOP.

Interesting facts: G.H.W. Bush actually won Asian voters against Clinton in 1992. G.W. Bush won 44% of the Asian vote in 2004.

Actually this is better phrased as: Permitting massive numbers of Asians to settle in the United States has backfired on the historic population of the Untied States, who, of course, did not vote for nor support it at any stage.

Asian societies are profoundly corrupt and spectacularly failed for the most part. the last thing we want is to recreate these conditions amongst our people.

Loudoun GOPer

So Shaun, just so we’re clear. If I oppose a “path to citizenship” for people who came to this country illegally, does that make me a racist? If I oppose a system that allows millions of people to cross the borders illegally, sign up for welfare, get free health care, housing assistance, food stamps, etc…, and then turn around and make them citizens so they can vote for the politicians that want to give them more of my money, does that make me a ‘nativist’?

I’m just trying to get a handle on who qualifies as a ‘nativist’ in your rant here, because you seem to have painted with a pretty broad brush. Do you mind clarifying it for us simple folk who live in ‘Murica?

Rednecksrule

Brian and Shaun– the largest number of up votes may be found here at Loudoun ex GOPer’s post. Bri– where are the legions of right thinking pro illegal alien’s like you and Shaun?

Just so you know Democrats, a lot of us conservatives were open to immigration reform and even a pathway to citizenship following 2012. The stridency of the Democrat Party and the shrill cries from La Raza about how racist all of us Republicans are does not in anyway motivate us to acquiesce to your demands however. In fact after all of the demanding that occurred in 2013 and the threat of more “aggression” coming from that camp, the likelihood of anything being done is decreasing.

Paddycakes

As a part of my profession, I come into contact with a wide swath of this community. Most show an outspoken love of this country that has little to do with their better economic status. They are smart and when in the trades, quickly become very professional and excel at what they do.Most of all I admire that positive outgoing spirit that keeps them going despite setbacks. The negative message constantly generated by the GOP about nearly everything probably has 0 appeal. I suspect that most Republicans have little or no contact with the community and thus see it as monolithic…..all Pedro’s. They simply can’t accept the idea that this community is as diverse as the US.I suspect that they will provide a richness to our culture that at the present time is sorely needed.By the way, this cartoon is offensive enough to not deserve publication, even as a teaching tool. Show better sense.

Glaivester

They simply can’t accept the idea that this community is as diverse as
the US.I suspect that they will provide a richness to our culture that
at the present time is sorely needed.

Translation: whites are boring and stale.

Every time someone talks about “diversity,” “vibrancy” or “richness” they really mean “white people are bad, we need fewer of them.”

Dick Fuld

Of course, why we are just a nation of dullards waiting to be enriched by vibrant cultural diversity…smiley face : )

You know like those hell holes India, China and Mexico.

thatcher76

Yes, like the Mexican who lives next door to me and opened a auto-body shop & day-care service in his house with his whole extended familia. How entreprenuerial! It’s like living next to a god-damn construction site. Constant noise and people coming and going at all times of the day and night, etc. And don’t tell me to call zoning, me and the neighbors did that several times and they tell me they cant do anything because he claims it’s all a hobby and they cant prove otherwise.

Before you call a point “utterly ridiculous” perhaps you should research it first. This was also typical of the sloppy research, platitudes, and name calling that was prevalent in this mediocre article.

Persistent High Incidence of Tuberculosis in Immigrants in a Low-Incidence Country

In most industrialized countries, the annual numbers of cases and deaths caused by tuberculosis (TB) have steadily declined over the past century up to the mid-1980s (1,2) (Figure 1). Since then, an increasing number of TB cases in immigrants has reversed this downward trend in countries that have had substantial levels of immigration from areas with a high prevalence of the disease (1,3,4) (Figure 2). Today, the proportion of immigrants among persons reported as having TB exceeds 50% in several European countries, including Denmark, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland (5). A similar proportion has been predicted for the United States in 2002 (3). In Denmark, the doubling in reported TB cases over the last 15 years has reflected, in large measure, TB in immigrants from Somalia (6), who also account for a sizeable proportion of TB cases in other European countries and North America (7–11)….”

It’s utterly ridiculous. The idea that we should curb immigration because of treatable diseases is stupid.

TS1709

The newest strains of tuberculosis are untreatable. By the way, it is “stupid” for US citizen taxpayers to pay for the treatment (curable or not) for someone who does not have to be admitted into the nation in the first place. And if the immigrant “self admits” by entering the nation illegally then we have lost control of the situation.

And by the way, a major thrust of this article that immigrants from third-world nations do not have higher incidents of disease is “utterly ridiculous”. Also, this article has played the “race card” to the hilt comparable to what is typically seen from the Obama administration. So you people have the chutzpah to call yourself conservatives?

Oh my, playing the “race card’ again when you are out of arguments, how pathetic. This is very typical of what the Obama administration does to its Republican and conservative opponents.

Obviously, you would not care to mention this but illegal immigrants have caused tremendous burdens to the health care industry as by federal law they have to be treated but do not reimburse the hospitals for costs.

And you stated “I don’t waste time talking about ideology” then please inform us why you are on the board of directors of a website named “Virginia’s Conservative Voice”, it seems rather odd does it not?

No, it doesn’t. We are a center-right website. We’ve got the entire spectrum of the Republican Party here. I am it an ideologue, although I am a Republican.

Again, this is thinly veiled racism. If you consider that playing the race card, it’s not. It’s fact. When you’ve got folks here defending nativism and declaring that people are traitors for not protecting their genetic heritage, I think it’s pretty clear.

Yes, there are plenty of negative impacts to illegal immigration. That doesn’t mean we should not be finding solutions to end those impacts.

Rednecksrule

The solution Bri is to enforce the F ing immigration laws, not figure out ways to grant more amnesties..

cargosquid

The way to end that impact is to end illegal immigration or work to restrict it.

cargosquid

Well, he is a liberal….. thus the race card.

cargosquid

You are such a troll. You ignore facts. You ignore logic. You ignore data.

And then you insult people that present such to you.

Glaivester

By the way, the “mas deportations or amnesty” is a false choice. Simply enforcing our employment laws and deporting a large number of illegal aliens (not merely manipulating the numbers to make it look like you are doing so, as Obama is doing) would result in most of them leaving on their own, aka “attrition through enforcement” or “self-deportation.”

That’s true. It will be far harder to root out the thousands of chinese, who are inexplicably allowed to settle here and work in the most vital national security industries. They include many spys that are being sent in mass by the Communist government. Only a small number of whom will ever be caught and charged/imprisoned.

Inexplicable that is, unless you understand that these policies are the direct result of specific legislation that could be halted tonight. ( Not inevitable as the rising sun or the tides.) The groups that support endless mass immigration into the United States fear and loath the historic english speaking population and will do anything to displace and dispossess them.

TS1709

This article was poorly researched:

“Every time we have purged the ranks of poison, we have emerged stronger, producing leadership such as Eisenhower, Goldwater, and Reagan.”

Dick Fuld

This is so comically inaccurate as to provoke laughter. You can be certain this middling little man will not be at the barricades for the “purge.”

Well Bri-ey, you might want to protect your offspring from the gangs from MS 13… I have those amigos right around the corner from me here in Springfield…. Tell me again about the blessings of immigration!!

That’s why I support the second amendment. My wife is first generation American. So that’s at least one blessing of immigration I’ve received.

Rednecksrule

The amigos from MS13 who share your county and love of illegal immigration are not particularly scared of you nor your 2nd amendment. They come from a crap hole country that chews up and spits out little white puds like you.

I don’t claim to be a conservative. I don’t use ideological labels. I’m a Republican. I don’t work for any foundations. I’ve got three jobs, including Bearing Drift. The only one that pays me to write is Bearing Drift, and we’re funded by our advertisers.

DFCtomm

ahhh. This is starting to make more sense. We’ve got a climber here chumming the water with link bait. Think you’ll be able to sell the blog to Townhall in a couple of years? You smell like Trent Lott, crooked.

I have plenty of principles. But I don’t bother with ideological labels because I think the argument over who is more or less conservative is ridiculous, made by people who have never had to make a decision on public policy. So I don’t do it.

cargosquid

It also conveniently allows you to ignore conservative principles and point at conservatives that disagree with you as “nativists.”

augustoperez

Is this guy actually getting paid to write this swill???? The preservation of jobs for Americans and the preservation of American culture and values is all about enforcing immigration laws and deporting the citizens of foreign sovereigns back to where they are legally entitled to be present. Illegal aliens are disproportionately represented in the ranks of out of wedlock childbirth, teen pregnacies, criminal statistics, and many other negative statistical sectors. As to how to persuade illegal aliens to leave, I have a few suggestions. 1- In this era of NSA metadata, issue the policy that illegal immigration is a statutory crime as are its penalties. Make E-verify compulsory for all workers, and change the standard of the test for hiring an illegal alien from the current ridiculous one to one of “the average man on the street”… Then start nailing employers, landlords
and any agency that encourages the arrival or permanence of illegal aliens into the United States. 2- Make it mandatory for law enforcement at all levels to investigate, detain and arrest any illegal aliens who they come across. If it makes illegal aliens wary of reporting crime, and their neighborhoods become crime ridden, maybe that will encourage them to return home.
3 – Disqualifyhouseholds containing any illegal aliens from receiving any taxpayer funded aid or services. Also make it impossible for not-for-profits to aid illegal aliens. If they want to be accomplices, they can do that without the taxpayer’s aid. 5 – If an illegal alien has any assets, and has been in the commision of more than 3 crimes, nail them under RICO Act and wend them back home with nothing to show for their criminal enterprise. This kind of exemplary prosecution will have a chilling effect on the illegal alien population. 6 – When you catch an illegal alien, don’t bail them out here. This is a pretty cut & dry crime. Do you have a visa? No? You get sent home, where you can work. Want to appeal? Fine. Hire a lawyer and appeal via Skype from your homeland. At the very least it will whittle out a lot of the more outrageous litigants whose sole purpose is to remain in the US. 7 – Declare all contracts entered into by an illegal alien ull and void due to their being illegal and unenforceable. Any agreement with an unlawful purpose is void, also when the person lacks the legal capacity, such as the legal presence to enter into it… Apply this to all commercial contracts including real estate and social contracts including marriage contracts. Which brings me to 8 – If you are caught here illegally and are the head of a household, you get sent home with all your dependants. They are your children, and spouse, and your responsibility…. Not ours.
We don’t have to arrest and deport all of them all. Just enough to raise the odds and consequences from making it profitable to come and remain to it being catastrophic to get caught.

Dan Poole

This Kenney guy is proof-positive of what the so-called “Know-Nothings” warned about: The Irish will subvert and destroy the U.S. from within. *no sarcasm*

Granted, the English-Protestant founding stock aren’t exactly worthy of praise themselves, as de Tocqueville documented in the 1830s. Amurrika as a “nation” was born to die. But even so, the Irish never should have been allowed to come here.

The man who wrote this article is deluded, he claims purging ‘nativists’ made the GOP great and brought people like Eisenhower. Eisenhower was the Nativitist who started operation “Wetback” which you decry so loudly and planned it. He also opposed Affirmative action and used the military to secure the border and deport illegals. Many non native species and diseases also did come from illegal immigrants and on Ellis Island there was a policy of checking all immigrants for diseases and turning them away. They no longer have that and Obama by executive order lifted the ban on AIDS HIV infected immigrants.

Janet Maria Wagner

Many Black Power movements like the Symbionese liberation Army and BP, and anti-western movements like ZANU in Rhodesia and the ANC for a time were communist movements, either Leninist and Maoist. Zanu and Mugabe still are Communists pretty much. The GOP defeated communism and the GOP praised Ian smith at the 64 convention that nominated Barry Goldwater.

JetsFan1984

Don’t vote republican if you believe in national security and the rule of law. Got it

53% of Hispanic babies in the U.S. are born to single mothers (source U.S. Census). 34% of inmates in federal prisoners are Hispanic (source Federal Bureau of Prisons). Don’t you just hate it when facts are racist?

Rednecksrule

bc3b, brother…don’t bother this asshat with facts like this… he is dreaming up all the ways he is going to spend his corporate money once he delivers amnesty for Microsoft, Facebook, Marriott…

MAC

You sir are a “hate filled” politician that will vilify anyone that stands in the way of your pandering for votes.Either you believe in the rule of law or you don’t. If you don’t then you have no business serving the American People in any capacity.
The American people have paid a heavy price due to illegal aliens thru lost jobs, lower wages, stolen identity, destruction of our neighborhoods, increased crime, lost loved ones and our children targeted for sexual assault.

YOur comment that it is Conservatives that are against amnesty just proves how out of touch people like you are with the average American.FYI, I know many Dems, Independents and Liberals that are against amnesty for they have seen first hand the negative impact millions of illegals have had on their lives..

There is no hate here. It’s a realization that we don’t want those who are filled with racial animosity and hate in the party. We are all against amnesty, and that’s not what Shaun is talking about.

Sgt Snuffy

Well thanks a whole hell of a lot there ass wipe. If you want to pay for maids, gardeners, cooks and panty washers be my guest but don’t do it with our tax dollars. These are criminals coming across the border in company strenght every damn day. They are bringing diseases this country hasn’t seen in generations, TB is on the rise, parasitic infections also are on the rise. And you want open borders. Get yer head out of yer ass and ask yourself where your true loyalty lyes with the USA or some foreign government south of the border. Oh and one last thing there studly, how much are you getting paid by LA RAZA and LULAC and the Drug Cartels.

Rednecksrule

He and his little monkey Brian Schoeneman, Lobbyist are also paid by the Chamber of Commerce which is nothing more than big corporations that pay these guys to shill for Open Borders so they get an endless supply of cheap labor. These guys will tell you about how if we increase immigration by 100 million people, it will make the US so prosperous that we will all be millionaires!!

The fellow who complains that others in this thread are iterating Democratic talking points works for a labor union?
Now that’s rich.

Rednecksrule

Yeah this guy says he isn’t conservative. He works for a union. He is a lobbyist. He lives in the federal wonderland of government largess. But somehow he and his asshat buddy Kenney represent the Republican party… well okay they probably do represent Cantor, Boehner, Ryan and a cast of dozens of other clowns.

Well Shaun Kenney you certainly seem to be driving out a lot of potential Republicans judging from the comments. When the Tea Party leaves you, you are screwed. Oh but you will have lots and lots of new immigrants to vote for your dumb@## party… but wait:

Hispanics Favor Bigger Role for Government

75%

Three-quarters of U.S. Hispanics prefer a big government which provides more services to a small one providing fewer services. This figure is significally lower among the public at large.

When it comes to the size of government, Hispanics are more likely than the general public to say they would rather have a bigger government which provides more services than a smaller government which provides fewer services.

Some 75% of Hispanics hold this view; just 19% say they prefer a smaller government. By contrast, just 41% of the public at large voice support for a bigger government.

Support for a larger government is highest among immigrant Latinos, with 81% holding this view. This share falls to 72% among second-generation Hispanics and 58% among third-generation Hispanics. Read More

Independence1

Let us remember that the government in Mexico is basically non-existent. No wonder they want a larger government presence. It is all relative.

Rednecksrule

They want a larger government because they want entitlements… your tax dollars fool.

Because all illegal immigrants are Hispanic. Thanks for demonstrating Shaun’s point.

cargosquid

75% of all illegal immigrants are Hispanic. 61% of the total is Mexican.

Thanks for pointing out your ignorance and knee jerk bigotry.

Rednecksrule

The Republican party has seen my last contribution in Virginia for hiring this asshat… Let me give you the number to the boarding house down the street from me asshat Kenney.. I am sure that all the families living there are natural Republicans…

First build a big F’ing fence, then and only then can talk begin on interior enforcement or regularization of status…
Your strawman about Nativists is crap., There is a wide spectrum of opinion on how to improve our border security that doesn’t include rounding up 12 million
The VA GOP will get no more money from me as long as you are the Exec Dir.
– a registered Republican in Alexandria, VA.

You never donated before. Anybody who says something like this has never donated, especially when they aren’t using their real name. And yes, there is a wide spectrum that doesn’t include the rounding up and that’s what were advocating. Why are none of you actually reading the article?

The Drill SGT

Given that I am not using my real name, it’s obvious that you can’t know if I’ve donated before, so why start your attack with a lie? I’m not using my real name because it’s clear that some activists will attempt to attack and destroy private citizens who enter into public debate (e.g. Joe the Plumber, and Mr Eich).

I’m not a political professional like you and Mr.Kenney, just stating my funding decision based on what I have read here.

I didn’t. I don’t believe that you’ve donated, and I’m not willing to take the word of someone who hides their real name. If you have and want to prove me wrong, feel free to post the link to your donations.

I use my real name. Nobody has tried to purge me.

Rednecksrule

hey Shawnie you were on the radio this morning! It was WMAL in DC…. better put on your frowny face cause not one damn caller would defend you Shawnie!! Even a guy who said he knew you from George Mason. So throw out all the nativists from your party dude! It sounds like it will be you, Eric Cantor and your main Monkey Brian whathisname below…

Rednecksrule

Lil Shawnie and his main Monkey Brian are too little to remember all the amnesties that have gone before them.. Let me educate you guys… There have been seven amnesties after 1986’s big amnesty that had all the same bull guano enforcement you little douchebags are touting now. See that amnesty begat more amnesties in the 1990s, many of them were signed by your main man George H Bush! There was an amnesty for Haitians for El Salvadorans, then there was the Life Act which made people pay a fee to adjust their status! Hey a fee–not an amnesty, right you guys?? Then you had W Bush, the retard, literal non enforcement of immigration laws… just like Obama yes, that is true.

So you nasty ol nativists… you are standing in the way of yet more illegal immigration! Let lil Shawnie and his main monkey Brian Open those Doors!!! We surely need another 40 million people (following chain migration post amnesty) that we neither have jobs for, nor can pay for their welfare needs…

Again, nothing you’ve said here is close to accurately describing Shaun’s position or mine. You guys need to stop with this histrionics. You’re carrying on like a teenage girl.

Rednecksrule

Brian I give you credit for allowing free speech here. Let me say that. You have about zero support,except for Kenney, his brother and about two other people who vote up your posts but you don’t block anyone. So even though you are a vile lobbyist illegal alien supporting beltway low life, you aren’t all bad…

It’s not that we don’t have any support, it’s that most sane people aren’t willing to hurl themselves into the mud with you, whereas I have a character flaw that forces me to fight when I think something is right, regardless of how nasty the other side gets.

Rednecksrule

I point out above that you have the votes in the US House to pass amnesty..um the Senate Bill..

If everyone is for it, why don’t you pass it! Go ahead Brian… do it. What’s holding you back. You have enough establishment RINOs to pass it and the leadership wants it. So put it to the vote… um could it be that those RINOs will be leaving their phony baloney job in the House of Representatives if they voted Yay on that bill?

Rednecksrule

I am amiss in using the term RINOs… Brian and Kenney here are Republicans and like many of their establishment ilk, they support corporate welfare, or in Brian’s case as he is a lobbyist for a union, Union welfare. See the unions want amnesty to increase their dues–they don’t give a rat’s bottom about what illegal immigration does to their actual memberships wages. The Union bosses who pay Brian’s salary will get more money to drive around DC in Limos, live in million dollar homes in McLean…high off the hog for them!

The only thing redeeming about the Republican party is guys like Senator Sessions who is no bullshit about illegal immigration. But I think that conservatives are on the road to leaving the party…the party of corporate welfare.

Darth_Inedible

The VA GOP is bravely positioning themselves as the champions of the home builders and the chicken processing industries.

I guess the plan is to have no actual troublesome constituents other than the business elite?

Just set up shop as sort of a perpetual fake alternative to McAuliffe’s boys, lazily campaigning to lose and rake in the bucks from businesses who are too cheap to work with Terry.

I’m not sure that’s a viable business plan fellas. I mean it works for the dems because they throw bloody red meat to their voters…

Rednecksrule

Your phrase, a fake alternative to McAuliffe’s boys is so stunningly accurate. This Kenney and this lobbyist douchebag who posts here for him–this Brian Schoeneman are exactly what you describe. So are national Republicans… fake alternatives to Pelosi, Reid and Obama…

I don’t understand where the hate for employers comes from. When did the Republican Party start taking talking points from the Democrats?

cargosquid

Its so nice to see that the VA GOP is going full amnesty. Yet another reason to not vote for any Republicans.

So, Mr. Kenney…you want to conflate bigots with those that oppose illegal amnesty? Go ahead. And you can be recognized as the GOP leader that helped make this a permanent Democrat state.

I see no plan above to “reform” immigration. Merely another demand for conservatives to “shut up” and get with the program. Your handlers have given you the marching orders. More cheap labor. More cheap immigrants.

And if we DON’T start deporting illegal aliens and give these amnesty, what do we do with the millions that follow, like the ones that came after Reagan mistakenly agreed to the Democrat planned amnesty?

When will the GOP realize that granting amnesty is NOT going to get Hispanic votes. EVER.

Ok then you agree that all those provisions in the Senate bill relating to amnesty should be dumped. You and Kenney are going to make sure that none of those amnesty provisions are passed! Good job Brian, now you are talking!!

Can you actually just read what we are writing and not put words in our mouth? Is that too much to ask for?

cargosquid

Do they get to stay in the country? Do they get to become citizens?

If so…it is amnesty. No matter how many conditions that you enact and actually think that they’ll do…. its amnesty. And what will you do when millions more come? And what will you do when millions DON’T take you up on the deal?

No, it isn’t. What if they get to become citizens after a decade in jail? Is that amnesty?

You are defining anything short of deportation to be amnesty, and that’s pretty much the nativist position. That’s why before we address the issue of what to do with folks already here, we need to secure the borders and reform the agencies.

So, let me get this straight, people who support a LEGAL immigration policy that currently takes in more LEGAL immigrants than all of the other countries of the world COMBINED are, according to the bright lights writing for this blog, “nativists” who need to be purged from the Republican Party. Pathetic.

You keep saying read the article. This article is a POS. It was grotesquely stupid because Brian, the base of the Republican party doesn’t want amnesty. Stop the bullshit that you aren’t talking about amnesty because you are.. you are playing the Democrat semantic game… Comprehensive Immigration Reform…which you equate to paying a fine is not amnesty. That fine is baloney–it is a piss in the bucket compared to the cost of illegal immigration and the amnesty you want. And DHS and Obama will waive it anyway.
Now you are going to cite me a poll about comprehensive immigration reform and how people want it…
So go ahead pass it. You tell Boehner and that vile Cantor to pass it… Why not, everyone wants it, right?

The reason I keep telling you to read the article is that nowhere in the article does Shaun advocate for amnesty. He doesn’t support amnesty. Neither do I. But you keep acting like we do.

Comprehensive immigration reform isn’t a euphemism – comprehensive means comprehensive. I support strengthening border patrols, beefing up border patrol, reforming ICE and the other agencies to shorten deportation times, implement e-verify and make it mandatory, creating sentencing guidelines that include jail time for employers who hire illegals knowingly, implement better tracking of legal visa holders, and allow for the use of drones and other technology on the borders, and reform of the legal immigration process to speed it up.

To get all of that, we have to give the other side something. So, for them, I would establish a path to legal status for illegals, something short of citizenship (with no voting rights), that lets them stay here and work, pay taxes, and requires an acknowledgement of wrongdoing and fines, and includes tough requirements like learning English, holding a job, not being on welfare, etc. And for the DREAM act kids, an expedited path to actual citizenship, which I would like to include some kind of national service.

That’s what I say when I say comprehensive. You see anything in there that looks like amnesty?

ReformedTrombonist

> The reason I keep telling you to read the article is that nowhere in the article does Shaun advocate for amnesty.

Perhaps not explicitly. But the undercurrent is there.

For example:

Rednecksrule

Every thing you propose to supposedly end illegal immigration in return for amnesty is already on the books–except for imprisoning illegal employers, but the law currently has crippling fines for that. Guess how much that has been enforced under Obama? zip… but wait before you blame Obama…it was zip under Bush too. Your RINO buddy Orin Hatch made sure that the employer sanctions were not prosecuted back in the 1990s. INS geared up to start hitting employers…aghast.. corporations… and the Marriott Bros gave Orin a call and Orin told INS to cut that crap out. Where’s the fence that was authorized after the last failed amnesty attempt? Where is the enforcement? Yeah it is Obama and he knows his voters so he is pretending to enforce the laws like usual.. but so did Bush.

It would be one thing to balance an amnesty with so called enforcement provisions if there wasn’t 30 years of history to show that nothing you blather on about is going to be enforced. In 1986, political scum made the exact same claim that they had solved illegal immigration so it is okay to have an amnesty…

Then Brian… they went onto six more amnesties in the 1990s…they were technical laws that had the effect of amnestying millions more after the initial amnesty of 1986,
and then illegal immigration exploded in that decade and the decade where W Bush didn’t enforce any immigration law…then Obama comes along and now the reality is, that if any illegal alien gets into the interior of the country…and they do claiming asylum… they aren’t going home.

And as for your Dream Act kids… Central Americans are now sending their children into the US in advance of your proposal.. DHS expects 60,000 illegal alien children to enter the country with their parents soon to follow…this year.

No, most of it isn’t already on the books, and you’re right, there needs to be better enforcement.

Ronald Reagan is “political scum?” Okay.

Rednecksrule

Yes it is… look at the INA… Employer sanctions are there…citizenship requirements to work…there…a requirement for a VISA system.. IIRIRA 1997. There have been countless appropriations for an improved border fence and other enhanced security measures as well as increasing the border patrol… Plus the President could actually legally invoke his power to enforce the immigration laws to do any of the things you say–drones, electronic monitoring etc. That doesn’t require a new law to do that–it is fully within Executive Power… Also you genius…

287 g… the Department of Homeland Security can use local law enforcement to pick up illegal aliens who were caught for other crimes. That is what Prince William County used in an attempt to control illegal immigration because the federal government won’t…and won’t after they implement all the stuff you say…

The law is very strict… but guys like you and Nancy Pelosi and Shaun here don’t want any of it enforced…

And like I say dude, bring the Senate bill to the floor of the House…why don’t you? You have the votes… why don’t you answer why you don’t do that?

You must be confusing with me John Boehner. I don’t decide what bills end up on the floor of the House.

Rednecksrule

No–splain why Boehner won’t bring the bill that you want to the floor…hmm… hell even that hideous Cantor backed away from your Dream Act bill–remember he was going to craft one. But curiously they won’t bring it to the floor–it will pass and it is the right thing to do according to you, right? And America wants it according to you…

So do it…you have to pass the bill to see what is in it right?

Law Student

The Virginia GOP will continue to lose as long as corporate, pro-third worldization of America HACKS like this MORON are allowed to run it.
People like Kenney will be driven out of this party, not patriotic conservatives. And if Kenney says what he said here to my face, he’ll be taught a lesson he won’t soon forget.

ReformedTrombonist

Let’s see… fellow works for the Republican Party, who wants us to vote for them in order to make the laws, telling us that those who want the laws that they wrote to be enforced are bigots.

Am I straight on that? It’s so confusing.

I guess I must be a “nativist”. You want to drive me out of the Republican Party? Heck, you did that years ago. But all it took then was John McCain. I just check back now and then to see if I’m welcome again. Guess not.

brianmacker

The dumb, it burns. You can’t drive anyone out of either party. i can say let’s drive the amnesty supporters out of the Democrat party, or Republican party all I want, and even if the majorities of both parties want that it is not going to happen. Sorry you are stuck with all the people you hate. All you are doing is rubber stamping the Democrat vision that the Rebublican party is the party of racism. You’ve validated the claim that border control is not about the rule of law and valid interests, but racism. If you are for anything but completely open borders that makes you a racist. Are you one? Apparently so.

The folks who engage in the kind of behavior we are opposed to are the ones who are validating the claim that the party is racist. We are trying to fight that claim by getting rid of the racists. It’s not hard.

ReformedTrombonist

Why is it racist to insist that the law be enforced? If these laws should not be enforced, then why should any? Why should we reward behavior that was unlawful?

And do you really think the way for the GOP to win elections is to insult a good percentage of its base?

Do you really think you can outpander the Democrats?

Here’s the real situation: the Democrats want amnesty because they want votes, and the Republicans want amnesty because their buddies in industry want cheaper labor.
And they hope to shame and shout down any internecine opposition with reckless and irresponsible charges of racism.

Lessee… One party shamelessly flatters their base, saying “We’re the ones we’ve been waiting for.” They’ve won two big elections with that message.

Now the GOP responds, saying to its base, “Listen up, bigots!” My prediction is that this won’t even win two little elections.

brianmacker

The article that Shaun was sent is not at all nativist. So he emellishes with a couple of unrelated images, ala Michael Moore and rants against a straw man. The linked article was spot on in it’s assessment of the situation. Rampant illegal immigration is leading to the importation of disease and the evidence he did not adress from the article was the association of the increase of disease with areas of high illegal populations. This is the product of prior amnesty. No one respects our border checkpoints where we screen for disease. West nile virus is now here thanks to the reasoning of this Shaun fellow. Thanks, Shaun.

Bigots need to be driven out of the Republican Party. Let’s start with Shaun Kennedy.

While we’re at it, let’s kick out everyone with an IQ below 50. What sort of idiotic faux “Republican” claims that Dwight Eisenhower was a NAZI?

Severn

“Every time we have purged the ranks of poison, we have emerged stronger, producing leadership such as Eisenhower..”

Right. That be the same Eisenhower who gave us Operation Wetback., with all those “jackboots” and “checkpoints” and “boxcars”.

Paul

Secure the borders first, then look at reform. We tried reform first in the 1980’s and the Democrats did not honor the agreement to secure the border. No reform until the border is secure. If Mexico can secure it’s southern border, why can’t the United States?

Rustler

Countries like Saudi Arabia, Australia and Israel deport their illegals and it works great for them. America is the only country in the world where there is this big movement by the establishment types to give amnesty to illegals.

Got a question for Mr Conservative and his main monkey Brian the Union Lobbyist. Ho ho ho!! A conservative Union lobbyist… what a joke… You can throw out WAYCISM WAYCISM dung at everyone who opposes amnesty. But you little pendejos… let me ask you–

There are votes right now in Congress to pass your amnesty…All Boner has to do is bring the Senate bill to the floor and enough Republican scum sacks like you would be there to pass it with 100 percent of the Democrats..

Since Shawnie pointed to statistics about the so called cost of deportations… let me quote the Heritage foundation about the cost of illegal immigration:

Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits.

Gosh golly Shawnie…..isn’t 6.3 trillion more than your cost of deportation at an estimated 6 billion…

I know Heritage is waycist waycist waycist…

Dave in Texas

You simply don’t get it. The divide is not about immigration, it is about illegal immigration. It is about the concept of “undivided loyalty”. That is necessary for the nation to survive. We don’t need citizens that only want to be here because of the welfare programs. We need citizens who love this country and the freedoms that the ComDems are destroying. We need citizens who will fight to keep the freedom this nation has always had.

My favorite immigrant testimony:

“Born American, but in the Wrong Place” by by Peter W. Schramm (April 2006)

Schramm has undivided loyalty to this great nation, as does Raphael Cruz.

When you “get it” you can try to lecture me about what I should support. I support this nation. And I will be in Washington DC on May 16th. See you there if you dare.

Dave in Texas

Rednecksrule

Another element of this Kenney fellow’s comprehensive immigration reform is the complete load of bullshit that there is a labor shortage and we…i.e. the tech industry needs foreign workers or it can’t possibly survive. This nonsense is put to rest here… Yes little Kenney it is from American Thinker… but it is okay because it cites liberal publications like you like (WAPO)

A new round of poor immigrants! That is what is going to happen when you announce your amnesty…well this people already know it is going to happen. This round is desperately poor, not much education, unskilled….

You do know that entitlements of all types are on the path to swallow the US without millions of new recipients right? These millions will be on some form of welfare their entire lives..

Conservative Latino

As a legal immigrant I do oppose any law that
provide Citizenship to illegal immigrants, that will be an slap on the face our
laws and to the people that obey the law coming legally to this country, we
have to wait more than five years
waiting abroad to come legally, not jumping the fence,. Illegal immigrants DO
NOT NEED CITIZENSHIP to work, to travel, to get benefits, to retire, they only
need a legal residence status, I had my
legal residence for many years, and I was not a second class citizen or whatsoever.
Illegal immigrants do not care about citizenship, the Majority of legal Latino residents
able to apply for citizenship do not care, so why to push for path to
citizenship , it is absurd, and set precedents for the future. Only citizenship
for legal immigrants, period.

Alexander Smith

The new illegal immigrant wave is uneducated, unAmerican,
opportunistic, more crime ridden than the American public at large,
taking jobs from Americans and devastating the middle class with wage
stagnation. Our current 2 million a year legal immigration is insane
with the current state of our economy (with 20 million unemployed), but
you think illegal immigrants deserve our attention and compassion far
more than the
back log of legal immigrants! Enforce our current laws, make e-verify
national, stop birthright citizenship to aliens, implement the
entry/exit system required by the 1986 amnesty law. Stop $4,5 billion a
year in illegal child tax credits to illegal aliens and the billions
more in welfare assistance throughout the country. Your argument of
current enforcement’s cost isn’t worth it is correct, because it isn’t
enforcement at all but an expensive catch and release program with no
purpose what so ever! We are already spending billions housing many of
them in our state and federal prison systems for serious crimes. The
illegals in our prisons are way over represented compared to our general
population. Your article and suppositions are asinine! Because
Americans are for sovereignty, protecting our borders and culture, you
believe us to be Jack Boots and wanting to set up camps and send them
back by the millions in trains! Enforce are immigration laws and they
will disappear by self-deporting.

Republicans
control the House for one reason and one reason only and they will
control the senate in 2017 for one reason and one reason only, because
of the Tea Party! You are on the losing side of Republican
non-leadership which Americans are sick of! Start writing your resume
because I predict you will be fired in the very near future!

Rednecksrule

The Tea Party is going to have to take down their boss Eric Cantor.. that repulsive reptile is on his way to replacing Boner. That is a tremendous loss for conservatives when that happens. Cantor is the most hideous form of crony pseudo conservative…

Alexander Smith

You see the Tea Party taking root. Praise the Lord Eric Cantor is now a foot note in history!

Beatrice Pryor

Mr. Kenney strikes me as extremely naive about human nature and the primitive, foreign, totalitarian political ideology of liberalism.

What, exactly, do the citizens of these states owe illegal aliens?

Beatrice Pryor

In Illinois, $55 million a year is wasted on keeping illegal aliens incarcerated.

Wouldn’t that money be better spent on the citizens?

Beatrice Pryor

It is cowardly and dishonorable for Mr. Kenney to put illegal aliens and their murderous reign of terror ahead of US citizens.

Beatrice Pryor

The Hepatitis B infection infection rate among illegal aliens is around 35 times the rate of US citizens.

Folks tend to forget that DC beltway sniper Lee Boyd Malvo was also an illegal alien.

Rednecksrule

And they forget that three of the 9/11 high jackers were also illegal–they were let back into the country on expired visas and their new student visas didn’t arrive until about six months after they had carried out the attack…

Beatrice Pryor

I’m not sure I can think of anything that cheapens the blood of our forefathers, who spilt it defending our sacred Constitution, than the whimsical nonsense espoused by the likes of Kenney.

There are few things more disrespectful to the millions of men who gave their lives for the Constitution, the states, and their progeny than the unconscionably selfish desires of Shaun Kenney to assuage his own guilt through party and national suicide.

The fact is – the citizens of these states owe illegal aliens nothing.

What’s disrespectful is you flooding the site with comments that have nothing to do with the article or what Shaun was trying to say.

If you want to attack anybody for engaging in disrepectful, slovenly thinking, look in a mirror. Nobody here is advocating amnesty, nor are we advocating support for illegals who commit other crimes once they’re here.

Enough nonsense.

Beatrice Pryor

So what do the citizens of these states owe illegal aliens, Brian?

Enlighten us.

Maybe at the same time, you or Mr. Kenney can enlighten Vanessa Pham’s family on the benevolent intentions of those who invade our shores:

You can ask me once and I’ll answer it. You don’t need to ask it ten times. See above.

jay5775

You’re a wuss and a disgrace. The nonsense is coming from you. Beatrice is wupping your butt and you can’t handle it. You people are going to destroy yourselves. You can’t win without us. We can destroy you by not showing up at the polls. You’re in big trouble.

So, Shaun Kenney has been caught skipping out on Laura Ingraham’s radio show?

Was that due to cowardice or just the same sort of slovenly thinking that went into the juvenile screed above?

Rednecksrule

Beatrice… you must be one of those nativists! God bless you. And Kenney is probably regretting this blog about now–it was really incredibly stupid to put this into this sort of thing. He should have quietly went on his way about procuring amnesty under the direction of that vile Eric Cantor. This sort of thing opens the obvious rift of corporate Republicans like him and the rank and file… He is trying to use the Democrat’s playbook like they did with gay marriage–use political correctness to drown out the opponents of amnesty. But this time it isn’t working because people know what happened in the last amnesties, which is about the only response the federal government ever has to illegal immigration…

Beatrice Pryor

The greatest danger to these states, with the exception of the primitive foreign ideology that is today’s liberalism, is the slovenly thinking and ignorance of human nature espoused by pseudo-intellectuals like Kenney.

The fact is – the citizens of these states owe illegal aliens nothing.

The basic rights that any individual who touches American soil is owed under the Constitution. But this isn’t a question of what is owed. It’s a question of how we solve an existing problem and ensure it doesn’t happen again.

Beatrice Pryor

That’s not true.

Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution requires the US government to defend each of the states against invasion.

Why would we not deal with 20 million foreigners as an invasion? It’s not an invasion because they’re bringing disease, death, and crime rather than guns?

What kind of depraved, diseased, suicidal, country tolerates an invasion by an army of twenty million hominids from the third world?

Nobody, including the founders, defines “invasion” to include individual instances of law breaking. That’s not what they meant when they wrote Article IV Section 4, nor is what anybody means now when they talk about invasions.

Beatrice Pryor

Again, you seem naive regarding the reality of the situation.

The reality of the situation is that it’s not an “individual instance” of law breaking, it’s anywhere from 10 to 30 million hominids making their way into our country, from the third world, for the purpose of using our schools, using our resources, occupying our land, spreading disease, and attacking our citizens.

What Germany did to Belgium was an invasion. What Japan did to China was an invasion. What we did to Canada was an invasion. There’s a big difference between defending the country from an armed assault from a belligerent state and an Irishman overstaying his visa.

Beatrice Pryor

Well, where you see utopia, I see balkanization and ethnic conflict. As this example demonstrates, illegal aliens are some of the most racist hominids on the planet:

Get real. 20-30 million foreigners who show up in my country contrary to our laws are invaders whether they got her a la Omaha Beach or in platoon-sized groups arriving 30 minutes apart. What planet did you come from?

Ace

Any individual who touches American soil illegally is owed nothing under the Constitution. You are disingenuous. You argue some kind of rights that inhere to being human must be recognized with explanation of where in the Constitution and our laws we are required to recognize illegal aliens and confer some kind of a benefit on them. Foreigners are owed nothing. I wouldn’t dream of going to Japan and expecting the Japanese to lift a finger for me because of my baby blue eyes.

Marti Webster Lanier

If Shaun is a democrat, why is he the executive of the Republican Party in Virginia?
Shaun are you aware illegals include not only Hispanics , but Chinese , and terrorists who cross our borders through Mexico ? Amnesty for all these undocumented people is STUPID Shaun!

Shaun isn’t a Democrat. Yes, everyone is aware that illegals include all races and ethnicities. Nobody is arguing for amnesty.

Beatrice Pryor

The notion that the citizens of these states owe illegal aliens something is indicative of an ideology that is fundamentally opposed to the core ideas and institutions enshrined in our sacred Constitution.

We, at the very least, owe these people the same respect we’d give any other human being. And I see nothing about resolving this issue that is fundamentally opposed to the core ideas in the Constitution. The founders expected us to pass rules regarding immigration and naturalization – it’s an enumerated power of Congress. Suggesting that we exercise that power to solve this problem is common sense.

Beatrice Pryor

Fair enough, but that’s not what Kenney is saying.

Kenney is saying that the Republican party owes illegal aliens a purge of individuals who do not agree with a counter-Constitution, open-borders agenda that is directly and openly contrary to Article 4, Section 4 of said Constitution.

No, that’s not what he’s saying. You guys are all leading with your chins here. Shaun isn’t in favor of amnesty, and he’s not arguing that anybody who disagrees with him is a nativist and should be drummed out of the party.

He was pretty clear that his definition of nativist only included those folks who think the only solution to the immigration issue is to forcibly round up every illegal immigrant and ship them back to their point of origin. I think that’s a pretty significant minority of people, although there are probably a few hundred thousand of them. Those folks give the rest of us a bad name and hand over ammunition to the Democrats to attack us all as being racist and xenophobic. I think that has a bigger impact on our ability to legislate than losing those few hundred thousand folks who are motivated by anti-immigrant animus.

If you are one of the minority of people who fit that definition then yes, Shaun, I and plenty of other people would prefer you not pretend you’re Republicans. But few folks will fit that definition.

Beatrice Pryor

It seems the height of naivete to think that the democrat party is going to stop attacking you as a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, trans-phobic sexist simply because you favor amnesty.

The democrat party attacks you as a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, trans-phobic sexist because it clearly makes you feel guilty and allows them to have their political and ideological way with you. Weakness invites more attacks, not fewer.

For whatever reason, there seems to be a fundamental ignorance within the Republican Party regarding the tactics and methodology of psychological warfare and how those tactics are applied by the likes of Schumer, Reid, et al.

Again, for the ten thousandth time, nobody here is advocating amnesty. And I don’t think, nor do I care, if the Democrats continue or don’t continue to attack us by calling us racists. They will do that regardless. The issue is whether the average independent or swayable voter is going to see those attacks and think they are legitimate.

If the party takes steps to get rid of the racists and makes it clear what we’re doing, those arguments won’t work. If we don’t, then those arguments will work and we’ll lose those votes.

That’s just the politics of it. It’s never about playing to the Democrats, it’s always about playing to the middle, because those folks aren’t motivated to vote based on what letter is behind somebody’s name.

There is nothing weak about being willing to tell people on your own side that they’re wrong.

Ace

Exactly right.

DelmarJackson

We have rules. We also have open border anti American globalists and the cheap labor lobby spending hundreds of millions of dollars to shove another amnesty down our throats and increase the mostly fraudulent worker visa programs by an increase of 300 percent. the problem is not the absence of rules, the problem is the Americans in name only who are using immigration for profit, power and punishment and shutting up all debate by smearing anyone who dares speak up.
we were lied to when they passed the 1965 Immigration Act, we were lied to and betrayed when they gutted the 1986 amnesty of all enforcement, and we are being lied to and betrayed now by weasels on both sides.
My only hope is the knowledge that people are not only waking up, they are taking names.

Ace

Amen to that.

Ace

That power was already exercised and nowhere did it provide for meekly accepting the presence of people who invite themselves into our country and take our jobs. The respect these people are owed as fellow humans is to treat them decently at all stages of their official or self-initiated deportation. The Constitution and the immigration laws are the supreme law of the land and it IS opposed to the core ideas of the Constitution, chief among which here is the supremacy idea. For you “resolving the issue” is surrendering to this massive illegal third-world immigration.

Rednecksrule

Except you and the Democrats…

leebo13

This guy must be in love with Jeb Bush. They don’t give a rats ass about American Citizens and the 20% who are un or under employed. They don’t care about the billions spent on encarcerated Illegal Aliens. Who cares what diseases they bring in that we’ve never seen or haven’t seen in decades. Ever try going to the Emergency Room of a hospital? Don’t go if your dying, you’ll never get in.
Shaun is an arrongant ass there should be kicked out of not only Virginia, but out of the US. He is no Republican, on second thought maybe he is.

OldRadioGuy

Many people that are against illegal immigration have never denied most of us came from other countries as our forefathers were looking for a better life too. BUT, they did it legally and without stealing jobs or using resources that they didn’t pay for!! I am not against legal immigrants no matter what country they come from. We do have to keep in mind that the original amnesty by Reagan did NOTHING to stop illegals. Made it worse in fact. I am more concerned about the millions of jobs that Americans have lost due to the illegals. AND PLEASE don’t bring up the lie about them not wanting to work the same jobs illegals do because it’s not true!! I have personally seen ICE busts at places with jobs I would work! I wish the people coming from other countries would spend more time trying to improve THEIR country instead of coming here and making life harder for US!!

curri

Nobody above the level of a precinct committeeman is calling for a new Operation Wetback. And we are lucky that ‘Murrica will be never again see vicious murdering racist imperialist killers like Ike holding high office. Today we have enlightened multicultural leaders who back Islamic jihadists who rightly seek to bring a just end to the world’s oldest Christian communities in Syria.

curri

‘Murrica today is just a livestock operation attached to a bloated military establishment. The ruling elites want an unlimited supply of livestock, that’s what “comprehensive immigration reform” is all about. The ethnic cleansing part is just a bonus.

Nice work. You really want to make the GOP disappear. 30 million new Democrat voters, most of them here to mooch off the fewer and fewer Americans who actually have jobs. You sir are an idiot. #NoAmnestyEver